<< <i>My main issue with toned coins is that dealers will use a high priced toner to justify stupid prices for ugly junk. Since humans tend to want to follow the herd, many will buy these coins based on the hype alone. (read $400 beanie babies) >>
That all boils to a simple matter of education and knowing what coins to buy and what coins not to buy. How many times have you seen a blazing MS62 or 63 Morgan that looks like it's been thrown against a wall, but it gets touted as being Choice BU because of the luster? Give it up - your argument doesn't hold water.
pmh 1nic, when you see a Rainbow in the sky, do you say AT? What the heck does that have to do with coins? For everyone else, years from now, what will be rarer, A or B?
You can fool man but you can't fool God! He knows why you do what you do!
Sometimes I honestly wonder if you people are watching the same coin market I am. Read and learn.
Heritage archives search string: PCGS MS65 Columbian Samples: Last 20 auctions listed by date, most recent first Conclusion: Blast white coins bring higher prices than 95% of toned coins. (Gosh, I wish I had said that)
#9280 Blast white $603.75 #14408 Yuck white $448.50 #14415 Toned $414.00 #9275 luster & toning $2012.50** This is the coin that most toneheads are raving about. It also represents a VERY TINY FRACTION of the toned coins on the market. Can someone explain to me why we are always talking about THIS COIN when discussing toning instead of all the others???? #12664 Blast white + light tone $575.00 #14102 Toned $460.00 #7124 Toned $471.50 #14041 Blast white + light tone $575.00 #6877 Toned $488.75 #11687 Blast white $690.00 #1082 Toned $414.00 #9615 Yuck white + light tone $414.00 #9623 Toned $437.00 #19815 Toned $460.00 #8137 Blast white $603.75 #8139 Toned $388.70 #8142 Toned $471.50 #16190 White $529.00 #14594 Toned $414.00
"...reality has a well-known liberal bias." -- Stephen Colbert
In what is likely to be a futile effort to get this well intended thread back on track.....
I prefer the toned piece and not just because we used to own it.
There are lots of very nice, desirable toned coins and lots of very nice, desirable color-free ones. There are also many nasty toned ones and many nasty untoned ones. Many toned coins are not "original" and many untoned ones are not "original".
I usually favor a colorful coin over a color-free one, as, quite simply, I like looking at pretty colors and I think toned pieces often display more personality, uniqueness, etc. But, I also appreciate untoned pieces.
It's a matter of personal taste and preference. Buy what you like and let others do the same, whether you agree with their choices or not! It's like so many other things in life, isn't it?!
<<< A simple fact is that 95% of toned coins do NOT sell for as much as their blast white counterparts. >>>
He then uses a specific example to prove his point, he takes a few past auction sale records for the PCGS MS65 Columbian Half. As anyone who's been around coins for awhile clearly knows, if there was just ONE coin in all of US numismatics that is well known to nearly always come with dark and unattractive toning, as well as marginal eye appeal, and where original undipped white pieces are very scarce,,,,it's the COLUMBIAN HALF, and this is the ONE example that Iwog uses to make his point that:
"A simple fact is that 95% of toned coins do NOT sell for as much as their blast white counterparts."
Of course Iwogs above statement is complete 100% untrue, and his "statistical data" is highly biased to one specific issue, extremely narrow, and completely skewed to serve his incorrect point.
So perhaps I can use an example coin such as a PCGS MS65 1880-S or 1881-S Morgan dollar where the highest price "blast white" coins sold for just very nominally over market prices, while MANY toned pieces have sold as high as 20-25 times market prices, in fact, toned pieces of these two dates have literally BLOWN AWAY the prices of blast white coins across the board. But no, I think that example would be as statistically pointless and as highly biased and skewed as Iwogs example.
"pmh 1nic, when you see a Rainbow in the sky, do you say AT?" No. I say beautiful, original.
"What the heck does that have to do with coins?" Only expressing the sentiment that toning (especially when it's got all the colors of the rainbow) isn't necessarily damage. That runs counter to your statement "but A is too dark, looks more like the damage that toning really is!" It's obvious you don't know the meaning of the word "damage."
"For everyone else, years from now, what will be rarer, A or B?"
Maybe A or maybe B. We have the means to arrest and inhibit toning. For those the coins that do tone there is no guarantee that they will tone in the way the pictured Iowa has. And if you dipping advocates have your way we may end up with more white (or washed out ) coins being available.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
So perhaps I can use an example coin such as a PCGS MS65 1880-S or 1881-S Morgan dollar where the highest price "blast white" coins sold for just very nominally over market prices, while MANY toned pieces have sold as high as 20-25 times market prices
Pretty funny. So you're going to use a coin that was preserved in bags by the millions in blast white condition to prove your point? Don't be absurd.
The Columbian is far more representative of other commemoratives and other classic series than your bags of Morgan dollars. In MOST cases save Morgans and moderns, finding a Gem BU coin is difficult while finding a gunked up one is easy. I suggest you attend a coin show some day since you don't seem to realize this.
"...reality has a well-known liberal bias." -- Stephen Colbert
Since this thread (at least) started out about MS67 Iowa's, here are Heritage auction results for NGC and PCGS MS67 Iowa's in the years 2002 and 2003:
NGC untoned ones: 7 examples at an average price realized of $259 NGC toned ones: 5 examples at an average price realized of $367 PCGS untoned ones: 3 examples at an average price realized of $314 PCGS toned ones: 10 examples at an average price realized of $493
Admittedly, this and other prices realized samples used to make points, are too small to be statistically significant and can be biased. However, I don't need to see any results to know that statements such as
<< <i>A simple fact is that 95% of toned coins do NOT sell for as much as their blast white counterparts >>
are incorrect. That quote was an opinion, not a factual statement, as claimed and one that many would strongly disagree with.
Because so many coins have been dipped to remove insignificant toning the value of the truly blast white coins (the ones that happen to have survive that way as a matter of happenstance) is diminished. The same type of thing happens (diminished value) every time a doctor is successful in ATing a coin that is difficult to identify as having being color enhanced. I don't appreciate the fact that these practices have gained some acceptance among collectors but it is what it is and nothing I'm going to say is going to change that.
As far as toned versus white is concerned, when it's time for me to sit down and look at 50 or 100 coins of a particular type by the time I'm done with 20 white ones there is nothing much special to notice from one to the next. Give me 50 or 100 toners and each coin has some unique characteristic to it. They may not all be blow your socks off monsters but you'll find something different with each coin. The toning at times can tell a story of how the coin was handled and stored (Mint Set, bag, roll, folder, etc.) with an almost infinite variety of colors and variations, some with fantastic eye appeal while others (as a result of the toning) have a negative eye appeal. That variety is one aspect of collecting I enjoy.
Too each his/her own.
The longer I live the more convincing proofs I see of this truth, that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice is it possible for an empire to rise without His aid? Benjamin Franklin
<< <i>Since humans tend to want to follow the herd, many will buy these coins based on the hype alone. >>
Then Iwog says:
<< <i>A simple fact is that 95% of toned coins do NOT sell for as much as their blast white counterparts. >>
OK, then which is it? 95% of toned coins do NOT sell as much as their blast white counterparts OR are people following the heard paying more for "hyped" toned pieces? You are contradicting yourself.
That "physics" about toned pieces looking the same is simply not true. I can only tell you the difficulties I've had taking pictures of toned coins. There is a definate difference in the angle of the shot. You can argue Einstein all you want but I can view a toned coin from different angles and it will look different.
Comments
<< <i>My main issue with toned coins is that dealers will use a high priced toner to justify stupid prices for ugly junk. Since humans tend to want to follow the herd, many will buy these coins based on the hype alone. (read $400 beanie babies) >>
That all boils to a simple matter of education and knowing what coins to buy and what coins not to buy. How many times have you seen a blazing MS62 or 63 Morgan that looks like it's been thrown against a wall, but it gets touted as being Choice BU because of the luster? Give it up - your argument doesn't hold water.
Heritage archives search string: PCGS MS65 Columbian
Samples: Last 20 auctions listed by date, most recent first
Conclusion: Blast white coins bring higher prices than 95% of toned coins. (Gosh, I wish I had said that)
#9280 Blast white $603.75
#14408 Yuck white $448.50
#14415 Toned $414.00
#9275 luster & toning $2012.50** This is the coin that most toneheads are raving about. It also represents a VERY TINY FRACTION of the toned coins on the market. Can someone explain to me why we are always talking about THIS COIN when discussing toning instead of all the others????
#12664 Blast white + light tone $575.00
#14102 Toned $460.00
#7124 Toned $471.50
#14041 Blast white + light tone $575.00
#6877 Toned $488.75
#11687 Blast white $690.00
#1082 Toned $414.00
#9615 Yuck white + light tone $414.00
#9623 Toned $437.00
#19815 Toned $460.00
#8137 Blast white $603.75
#8139 Toned $388.70
#8142 Toned $471.50
#16190 White $529.00
#14594 Toned $414.00
I prefer the toned piece and not just because we used to own it.
There are lots of very nice, desirable toned coins and lots of very nice, desirable color-free ones. There are also many nasty toned ones and many nasty untoned ones. Many toned coins are not "original" and many untoned ones are not "original".
I usually favor a colorful coin over a color-free one, as, quite simply, I like looking at pretty colors and I think toned pieces often display more personality, uniqueness, etc. But, I also appreciate untoned pieces.
It's a matter of personal taste and preference. Buy what you like and let others do the same, whether you agree with their choices or not! It's like so many other things in life, isn't it?!
<<< A simple fact is that 95% of toned coins do NOT sell for as much as their blast white counterparts. >>>
He then uses a specific example to prove his point, he takes a few past auction sale records for the PCGS MS65 Columbian Half. As anyone who's been around coins for awhile clearly knows, if there was just ONE coin in all of US numismatics that is well known to nearly always come with dark and unattractive toning, as well as marginal eye appeal, and where original undipped white pieces are very scarce,,,,it's the COLUMBIAN HALF, and this is the ONE example that Iwog uses to make his point that:
"A simple fact is that 95% of toned coins do NOT sell for as much as their blast white counterparts."
Of course Iwogs above statement is complete 100% untrue, and his "statistical data" is highly biased to one specific issue, extremely narrow, and completely skewed to serve his incorrect point.
So perhaps I can use an example coin such as a PCGS MS65 1880-S or 1881-S Morgan dollar where the highest price "blast white" coins sold for just very nominally over market prices, while MANY toned pieces have sold as high as 20-25 times market prices, in fact, toned pieces of these two dates have literally BLOWN AWAY the prices of blast white coins across the board. But no, I think that example would be as statistically pointless and as highly biased and skewed as Iwogs example.
dragon
"pmh 1nic, when you see a Rainbow in the sky, do you say AT?"
No. I say beautiful, original.
"What the heck does that have to do with coins?"
Only expressing the sentiment that toning (especially when it's got all the colors of the rainbow) isn't necessarily damage. That runs counter to your statement "but A is too dark, looks more like the damage that toning really is!" It's obvious you don't know the meaning of the word "damage."
"For everyone else, years from now, what will be rarer, A or B?"
Maybe A or maybe B. We have the means to arrest and inhibit toning. For those the coins that do tone there is no guarantee that they will tone in the way the pictured Iowa has. And if you dipping advocates have your way we may end up with more white (or washed out
Pretty funny. So you're going to use a coin that was preserved in bags by the millions in blast white condition to prove your point? Don't be absurd.
The Columbian is far more representative of other commemoratives and other classic series than your bags of Morgan dollars. In MOST cases save Morgans and moderns, finding a Gem BU coin is difficult while finding a gunked up one is easy. I suggest you attend a coin show some day since you don't seem to realize this.
NGC untoned ones: 7 examples at an average price realized of $259
NGC toned ones: 5 examples at an average price realized of $367
PCGS untoned ones: 3 examples at an average price realized of $314
PCGS toned ones: 10 examples at an average price realized of $493
Admittedly, this and other prices realized samples used to make points, are too small to be statistically significant and can be biased. However, I don't need to see any results to know that statements such as
<< <i>A simple fact is that 95% of toned coins do NOT sell for as much as their blast white counterparts >>
are incorrect. That quote was an opinion, not a factual statement, as claimed and one that many would strongly disagree with.
<< <i>and one that many would strongly disagree with. >>
I strongly disagree with it. And this one too:
<< <i>a toned coin looks pretty much the same no matter how you view it. >>
Yep. The hits just keep on coming.
Clankeye
Because so many coins have been dipped to remove insignificant toning the value of the truly blast white coins (the ones that happen to have survive that way as a matter of happenstance) is diminished. The same type of thing happens (diminished value) every time a doctor is successful in ATing a coin that is difficult to identify as having being color enhanced. I don't appreciate the fact that these practices have gained some acceptance among collectors but it is what it is and nothing I'm going to say is going to change that.
As far as toned versus white is concerned, when it's time for me to sit down and look at 50 or 100 coins of a particular type by the time I'm done with 20 white ones there is nothing much special to notice from one to the next. Give me 50 or 100 toners and each coin has some unique characteristic to it. They may not all be blow your socks off monsters but you'll find something different with each coin. The toning at times can tell a story of how the coin was handled and stored (Mint Set, bag, roll, folder, etc.) with an almost infinite variety of colors and variations, some with fantastic eye appeal while others (as a result of the toning) have a negative eye appeal. That variety is one aspect of collecting I enjoy.
Too each his/her own.
<< <i>Since humans tend to want to follow the herd, many will buy these coins based on the hype alone. >>
Then Iwog says:
<< <i>A simple fact is that 95% of toned coins do NOT sell for as much as their blast white counterparts. >>
OK, then which is it? 95% of toned coins do NOT sell as much as their blast white counterparts OR are people following the heard paying more for "hyped" toned pieces? You are contradicting yourself.
That "physics" about toned pieces looking the same is simply not true. I can only tell you the difficulties I've had taking pictures of toned coins. There is a definate difference in the angle of the shot. You can argue Einstein all you want but I can view a toned coin from different angles and it will look different.
jom